I’m going to add a bit of context here. In 1972, Thomas Keneally
became the first Australian novelist to be shortlisted for the Booker Prize
(Patrick White’s nomination for ”The Vivisector” was for the 1970 missing Booker and that award
was not made until 2010), at that time generally “Australian Literature” was
not taught in schools, we’d only been a Federated Nation for 71 years. Only
five years prior to the release of this book a Referendum was held to agree
with the electorate to allow the count of Aboriginal people in the census. I
distinctly recall studying in 1980 and being directed to NOT study the
Australian texts (we had a choice of texts) as they were sub-standard and that
given our short history, there was no such thing as “Australian Literature”.
Add to that that in my teens I recall watching the film version of this novel
so I knew the story prior to reading this story.
Based on the story of Jimmie Governor, this is a tale of
displacement in one’s own land, of persecution, of unclear identity, shame and
more. Written from an aboriginal point of view (which in itself is controversial
– an Anglo-Saxon writing as an aboriginal?) it covers a lot of territory in its
small frame (my edition is 178 pages).
Set around the time of the Federation of Australia (1901), Jimmie
Blacksmith is of mixed race, with an aboriginal mother and an unknown white
father, he is “taught” and influenced by the local missionary Rev. Neville and
our tale begins with his maternal uncle setting out, with Jimmie’s initiation
tooth in his pocket, to walk 100 miles to find Jimmie, who has married a white
girl. We then flash back to the events which led to Jimmie’s marriage, the
arrival of his maternal uncle, and further on to Jimmie’s involvement in
unlawful events (I don’t want to add spoilers) and then onto the subsequent
events.
Healy, Lewis, now Newby had each
staked his soul on Jimmie’s failure. If they were so supreme on their land that
they didn’t need to be political, why should they yearn so for Jimmie’s
mistakes; and, when mistakes were not made, dream them up?
At times this could be a hard novel to decipher, with Aboriginal
references and language;
To his mind people should continue
to wed according to the tribal patter. Which was: that Tullam should marry
Mungara, Mungara should wed Garri, Garri should wed Wibbera, Wibbera take
Tullam’s women. But here was Jimmie, a Tullam, married in church to a white
girl.
However this is convincing and, to me, a lot more realistic
than Peter Carey’s gimmick of language and his attempt at ventriloquism in “True
History of the Kelly Gang” (always a book I’ve disliked).
In 2012 “The Chant of Jimmie Blacksmith” has stood the test
of time and should be celebrated as a master stroke in Australian Literature
and voice, and although now people are asking Keneally if he would have been
better placed to have written this from the settler’s point of view, I found
the tackling of such a controversial subject honest and ringing true. Let’s not
forget that it took until February 2008 before a Prime Minister of this country
would formally apologise to the indigenous people of this land.
This novel wouldn’t have been my choice for the winner of
the 1972 award but it is an important one and for people new to Booker Prize
lists and the Australian novel one I would recommend.
Cross posted at my blog.
Tony - thanks for the bit of history - i had not realized the topic of Australian literature had such history. I was lucky enough to take a semester of "Australian Lit" at the University of Western Australia in 2003, and things had certainly changed some (with a greater focus on non-anglo Australian writers). Though as the American exchange student I remember being embarassed to answer the question of who was my favorite Australian writer with "I don't think I can name any." The Bookers are fixing that problem for me!
ReplyDelete